Everything that goes wrong after you (or a tech) touches the machine is going to be your fault, whether it is or not. At some point, you are going to be asked to help someone with a lot of internal clout, this will come to pass, and you will be out of a job.
Don't you have some functioning labour laws in USA? Fireing an employee because he is doing his job?
to a quality open source product! Whatever Apache is doing development and management-wise, don't change a thing!
They rejected many security patches from OpenBSD for httpd 1.3.29, and even before OpenBSD forked httpd 1.3 (the infamous license change) the in-tree diff was over 4000 lines of code.
Because they are largely uneducated peasants living in fundamentalist theocracies lacking even the most basic necessities for a balanced, rational society.
Oh my God, perhaps you should educate yourself? Watching Fox News does not count.
Saddam have been a brutal agressor is whole life, and much of it with US approval and support. US invaded Iraq to control the huge oil/gas resources, or do you believe it was because Iraq had WMD, oh wait, it was because Saddam was behind 9/11, oh wait, it was for freedom and democracy?
The thing that is least documented would have to be/etc/conf.d/ entries. But mostly a quick google is all you need.
On OpenBSD it's seldom that I've to google for something that is part of the base install (and that covers alot). Most, if not all, config files are documented in man pages or other documentation available (like the excellent
FAQ).
You have to keep in mind the "man-pages" package is actually a separate project on its own. It's not strictly part of the Linux realm.
It is seldom I see that anyone is recommending Linux users to read man pages. I used to use Linux (SuSE, a few years ago), but quality issues and poor documentation made me move away from it. In general, the Linux man pages are of low quality (out-of-date, incomplete and buggy), if there are any man pages at all to read.
New
OpenBSD users with a Linux background are unused to actually read documentation, and just post on a mailinglist without doing some research first. Considering the quality of Linux documentation, that is understandable behaviour. However, on OpenBSD, the man pages and other documentation is high quality and is expected to be read.
The whole "as long as the runtime libraries are there" catch is what it's all about. It's not reasonable to expect people to deal with dependencies.
It's the package maintainers job to deal with library dependencies. I a Linux distro is unwilling to do this, why should I use it in the first place since it is obiously of low quality?
Personally, I think it may have more to do with generations of religious zealotry breeding a general hatred of western culture, and cartel-like governments using that to control the population and secure their own power. Then again, we do pretty much the same thing in USA.
USA has a long history of toppling democracies, crushing popular movements and installing/supporting dictatorships in the Middle-East and elsewhere.
These US policies are backlashing fairly often. The USA mostly created, trained and financed those very same groups they are hunting down in their so-called "war on terror". During the Soviet occupation of Afganistan, billons of dollars was poured into these networks. US specialists in terrorism, guerilla/urban warfare and insurgency trained what is to become their enemies.
USA through their puppet governments are crushing down hard on any popular movement for social improvement, democracy or worker rights. Socialists, union activist, academics or generally any on the left side are hunted down and prosecuted. What remains are radical religious movements that hardly stand for any social progress. Yet another backlash. A good example of this is Iran where the brutal US installed was toppled.
I don't see why it is hard to have QT and GTK libraries on each system.
Because:
- its ugly design
It's not an issue of bad design, but of neccessity. As long as different applications are using different libraries, you end up installing those libraries.
- it involves lots of code duplication
There is no code duplication involved, however, there is some overlap of
functionality
- it sucks on lean platforms (for example Maemo)
If your computer is very limited, then you don't want to run either KDE or GNOME.
- it doubles your chances of being hit by a security flaw
Care to elaborate on that?
- it produces a lot of unmaintained basic infrastucture code (like VFS) where the implementation is the spec.
Just because some random Linux distro is offering both KDE and GNOME does not imply that KDE or GNOME stops maintaining their own code.
- standards are a Good Thing
Yeah, yeah, sure. Except when the "standards" sucks.
Too bad for Saddam that he decided to play chicken with the weapons inspectors instead of complying fully as he was required to do.
The "full compliance" demand was manufactured by the US administration as an excuse to invade Iraq.
According to Hans Blix (head of UN inspection teams) they complied well enough, not perfect, though. Moreover, much of the information the inspection teams was given from USA was very wrong or outright lies designed to provoke a reaction from the Iraqi government.
If he hadn't decided to bluff, then he might very well still be torturing his people to death in large numbers today.
Where Saddam stopped, USA continued, and committing many war crimes as well. Why do you think that USA is so hated by the general population in the Middle-East?
....more rivalry between the BSD folks and the Linux folks. Using phrases like "incompetent idiots" lifts this out of 'friendly sibling rivalry' towards Holy War territory.
The *BSD in general think that most Linux developers does not care about quality, only about "performance". The constant stream of Linux kernel root exploits is one example of lack of quality.
No he is simply getting less tolerant of "sloppy" programming. He is one of the very very few that believes in doing it the way that gives you the best speed.
To achieve that speed, quality is sacrificed (the Linux kernel as a new local root exploit averaging more than once a month). Drivers written under NDA is welcomed with open arms, and this gives the open source variant of binary blobs.
the BSD guys have their reasoning and if you read more info about this it is not a shot in the dark that Linus is taking but he is frustrated that after many discussions nobody cares as much as he does on the performance issues.
Linus does not care about quality, but the *BSD does.
It will be interesting to see what weapon the BSD crowd will retaliate with.
What is that 'retaliate' that you talk about? One of the reason I use OpenBD, is that I don't have to worry about the weekly stream of Linux kernel local root exploits.
If it is GPL, but the copyright is retained by a small number of people who are willing to sell their rights to it, then it can be taken closed-source. Of course, anyone can fork from the last GPL'd version. That's essentially what happened with SSH if I understand that correctly.
SSH was under a freer license than GPL, but did use a GPL library. Today OpenSSH (a derivative of SSH) contains no GPL code.
Have a look at the
OpenSSH history
The problem with this reasoning is that all contemporary OSes have been designed with multiprocessor machines in mind and are thus not only heavily multithreaded, but also have schedulers designed to detect and take maximum advantage of, multiple CPUs.
A kernel intended to run on a single CPU machine can be made to run faster, partly due to less need to use locks. OpenBSD has offers two kernels for the archs that supports multi CPU: one single CPU kernel, and a multi CPU kernel. The single CPU kernel is faster.
Ever heard of a "tainted" kernel? Ever hear of www.open-hardware.org (not to be confused with www.openhardware.org BLING!) Ever hear of http://sourceforge.net/projects/openhardware/ [sourceforge.net]?
I am refering to the fact that while OpenBSD goes public, after many months of private correspondence,
to pressure a hardware vendor to release hardware docs, the Linux crowd does not give any support. That crowd is happy with docs released under NDA (UltraSPARC III support, as an example). Hippocrites.
This is why people argue that the BSD license is more open than the GPL. However, the restriction against linking with proprietary code is what ensures that certain free software actually gets written. It's a means to an end that ultimately results in true openness.
But binary blobs, and their open source equivalents (drivers written under NDA), are common in Linux. While OpenBSD is free and fights for hardware docs, the Linux crowd just sits on the sideline doing nothing.
I agree, with one exception. On development+gateway boxes it's good to be able to do ssh -Y as root so you can start ethereal as root and see WTF is going on with the network.
You should consider using something else than ethereal. That program was removed from the OpenBSD ports tree due to bad security track (remote exploits) and authors unwilling to do something about it:
Revision 1.91, Wed Jul 14 21:52:25 2004 UTC (21 months ago) by pvalchev Branch: MAIN CVS Tags: HEAD Changes since 1.90: +1 -1 lines FILE REMOVED
Remove ethereal from the ports tree. Right during 3.5, it had more than a dozen remote holes being fixed, that we shipped with. Weeks later things have not improved, and there continue to be problems reported to bugtraq, and respective band-aids - but it is clear the ethereal team does not care about security, as new protocols get added, and nothing gets done about the many more holes that exist.
Maybe someone will at least privilege separate this one day, and then the OpenBSD stance with respect to this may change.
Encouraging people to run broken software by distributing packages with known security holes is not desired by any of us.
If you know what the remote IP addresses are going to be (consumer grade but fixed IP addresses at remote ends) then ssh would be an adequate solution by itself, and a lot simpler than most of the alternatives. With its ability to forward ports and X windows displays, it can handle pretty much anything.
It's peculiar that this is the only post that recommends ssh for remote administration. It is very easy to setup and make work, in contrast to VPN in general.
Slashdot Mirror
I've not heard heard about Pike before your post, and is not in the ports collection either as far as I can see. Care to prepare a port?
Don't you have some functioning labour laws in USA? Fireing an employee because he is doing his job?
Apache http 2.x is supposed to run much better on Windows than 1.3, and do indeed use threading.
So what? mod_ssl is an Apache module using the OpenSSL library, but borrows code as well from OpenSSL. They do acknowledge that: http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/usr.sbin /httpd/src/modules/ssl/ssl_engine_init.c?rev=1.27& content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup
They rejected many security patches from OpenBSD for httpd 1.3.29, and even before OpenBSD forked httpd 1.3 (the infamous license change) the in-tree diff was over 4000 lines of code.
Oh my God, perhaps you should educate yourself? Watching Fox News does not count.
Saddam have been a brutal agressor is whole life, and much of it with US approval and support. US invaded Iraq to control the huge oil/gas resources, or do you believe it was because Iraq had WMD, oh wait, it was because Saddam was behind 9/11, oh wait, it was for freedom and democracy?
On OpenBSD it's seldom that I've to google for something that is part of the base install (and that covers alot). Most, if not all, config files are documented in man pages or other documentation available (like the excellent FAQ).
You have to keep in mind the "man-pages" package is actually a separate project on its own. It's not strictly part of the Linux realm.
This seems to part of the problem.
It is seldom I see that anyone is recommending Linux users to read man pages. I used to use Linux (SuSE, a few years ago), but quality issues and poor documentation made me move away from it. In general, the Linux man pages are of low quality (out-of-date, incomplete and buggy), if there are any man pages at all to read.
New OpenBSD users with a Linux background are unused to actually read documentation, and just post on a mailinglist without doing some research first. Considering the quality of Linux documentation, that is understandable behaviour. However, on OpenBSD, the man pages and other documentation is high quality and is expected to be read.
[/rant]
It's the package maintainers job to deal with library dependencies. I a Linux distro is unwilling to do this, why should I use it in the first place since it is obiously of low quality?
USA has a long history of toppling democracies, crushing popular movements and installing/supporting dictatorships in the Middle-East and elsewhere.
These US policies are backlashing fairly often. The USA mostly created, trained and financed those very same groups they are hunting down in their so-called "war on terror". During the Soviet occupation of Afganistan, billons of dollars was poured into these networks. US specialists in terrorism, guerilla/urban warfare and insurgency trained what is to become their enemies.
USA through their puppet governments are crushing down hard on any popular movement for social improvement, democracy or worker rights. Socialists, union activist, academics or generally any on the left side are hunted down and prosecuted. What remains are radical religious movements that hardly stand for any social progress. Yet another backlash. A good example of this is Iran where the brutal US installed was toppled.
The list goes on and on.
It's not an issue of bad design, but of neccessity. As long as different applications are using different libraries, you end up installing those libraries.
There is no code duplication involved, however, there is some overlap of functionality
If your computer is very limited, then you don't want to run either KDE or GNOME.
Care to elaborate on that?
Just because some random Linux distro is offering both KDE and GNOME does not imply that KDE or GNOME stops maintaining their own code.
Yeah, yeah, sure. Except when the "standards" sucks.
The "full compliance" demand was manufactured by the US administration as an excuse to invade Iraq. According to Hans Blix (head of UN inspection teams) they complied well enough, not perfect, though. Moreover, much of the information the inspection teams was given from USA was very wrong or outright lies designed to provoke a reaction from the Iraqi government.
Where Saddam stopped, USA continued, and committing many war crimes as well. Why do you think that USA is so hated by the general population in the Middle-East?
Dude, have you heard about Google?
The *BSD in general think that most Linux developers does not care about quality, only about "performance". The constant stream of Linux kernel root exploits is one example of lack of quality.
To achieve that speed, quality is sacrificed (the Linux kernel as a new local root exploit averaging more than once a month). Drivers written under NDA is welcomed with open arms, and this gives the open source variant of binary blobs.
the BSD guys have their reasoning and if you read more info about this it is not a shot in the dark that Linus is taking but he is frustrated that after many discussions nobody cares as much as he does on the performance issues.
Linus does not care about quality, but the *BSD does.
What is that 'retaliate' that you talk about? One of the reason I use OpenBD, is that I don't have to worry about the weekly stream of Linux kernel local root exploits.
SSH was under a freer license than GPL, but did use a GPL library. Today OpenSSH (a derivative of SSH) contains no GPL code. Have a look at the OpenSSH history
A kernel intended to run on a single CPU machine can be made to run faster, partly due to less need to use locks. OpenBSD has offers two kernels for the archs that supports multi CPU: one single CPU kernel, and a multi CPU kernel. The single CPU kernel is faster.
I am refering to the fact that while OpenBSD goes public, after many months of private correspondence, to pressure a hardware vendor to release hardware docs, the Linux crowd does not give any support. That crowd is happy with docs released under NDA (UltraSPARC III support, as an example). Hippocrites.
But binary blobs, and their open source equivalents (drivers written under NDA), are common in Linux. While OpenBSD is free and fights for hardware docs, the Linux crowd just sits on the sideline doing nothing.
Think about it.
Dear Tom,
this is Slashdot and the term "think" does not apply.
You should consider using something else than ethereal. That program was removed from the OpenBSD ports tree due to bad security track (remote exploits) and authors unwilling to do something about it:
For starters, you have the PATRIOT Act.
It's peculiar that this is the only post that recommends ssh for remote administration. It is very easy to setup and make work, in contrast to VPN in general.